facebook - Disability Hate Crime Network

posted: 30/07/2010

People interested in stopping HIV hate and other forms of disability hate crime can join the facebook self-help group.

Fighting HIV and disability hate crime, bullying, abuse, and stigma is a big current issue with a major Inquiry collecting evidence of the problem. You can find out more about the Inquiry and how to tell your story here.

HIV Policy expert Chris Morley of George House Trust was interviewed at length about the hate crime experiences and impacts on people living with HIV, what works in combating HIV stigma as part of this Inquiry. But people's first hand accounts really need to be heard.

Join the facebook Disability Hate Crime Network here.

Job restrictions for asylum seekers?

posted: 30/07/2010

After the Supreme Court decision we reported yesterday allowing some 'legacy case' asylum seekers to apply for permissiion to work, Home Office ministers are now trying to limit the jobs these 45,000 asylum seekers could take.

The immigration minister, Damian Green, wants to stop asylum seekers from taking most jobs and restrict them to types of work where the government has said there are official shortages.

Home Office officials are investigating the possibility of telling asylum seekers they can apply only for vacancies among 400,000 skilled jobs in shortage occupations – a tiny fraction of almost 30 million jobs in the UK economy.
 

Some teaching, engineering, welding, dancing jobs only
Asylum seekers would have to be qualified maths teachers, chemical engineers, high-integrity pipe welders, experienced orchestral musicians, or ballet dancers or have other unusual skills to have any hope of being given permission to work. The jobs are the same as the types of jobs open to migrants from outside Europe wanting to work in the UK under the new points-based immigration system.
 

This week's supreme court ruling said refused asylum seekers who made a second fresh claim for refugee status should be allowed to work if they had waited more than 12 months for a UKBA decision.
 

The Supreme Court ruling applies a EU directive which set minimum standards for how asylum seekers are treated throughout Europe, so asylum seekers are treated with basic dignity. The Supreme Court rejected the home secretary's case that this group of asylum seekers should not have this protection because their first application had been rejected.
 

10 years of 'right to work' campaigning
Refugee welfare groups have been fighting for more than 10 years to lift the ban on asylum seekers being allowed to work in Britain while their applications are decided. This is the first time the courts have backed the principle.
 

Immigration barristers say the ruling will mean that tens of thousands of failed asylum seekers whose fresh applications are grinding their way through the system will be entitled to basic rights, including the right to work. The court said any problem with undeserving cases should be dealt with by deciding them quickly rather than by punishing them by depriving them of their fundamental rights.
 

45,000 of the ‘legacy cases’
The Home Office says that up to 45,000 refused asylum seekers are likely to be affected by the ruling. Many of them are among the 450,000 "legacy cases", some dating back more than 10 years, which the Home Office is working through in a backlog exercise.
Immigration minister Green confirmed his intention to severely restrict the jobs open to asylum seekers who have waited more than a year for a decision. He said: "I believe it is important to maintain a distinction between economic migration and asylum – giving failed asylum seekers access to the labour market undermines this principle." He claimed the ruling would have only a short-term effect as "the long delays in the asylum system will be resolved by the summer of next year when all the older asylum cases are concluded".
 

Disbelief at plan to clear 450,000 backlog within 12 months
It is hard to see how all these legacy cases can possibly be decided by next summer. The private company Serco has just lost its £15m contract with the UK Border Agency (UKBA) which was to help clear the huge backlog in legacy asylum claims, amid allegations that the system is in complete chaos.

Serco was given the contract last year to speed up clerical work and help caseworkers clear the backlog of 450,000 asylum cases. Many of the cases date from the mid-1990s. The plan was that with Serco's help the entire backlog would be dealt with by 2012. But complaints started to come in almost immediately that Serco’s work was slowing the system down. According to one insider, there were too many inaccuracies and omissions by Serco.

UKBA staff have now been told that the work is to be returned to UKBA civil servants. So far, it seems, only about 200,000 legacy cases have been dealt with and the system remains in chaos. At the same time as the announcement that the work is being taken back by UKBA, a leaked memo from the coalition government reveals plans to axe 7,000 UK Border Agency jobs - 1,700 this financial year. How the UKBA will be able to deal with new asylum cases, not to mention the scandalous backlog, with a third fewer staff, remains to be seen.
 

Home Office job restrictions plan ‘disappointing’
Jonathan Ellis, director of policy and development at the Refugee Council, said the Home Office's response to the ruling was "disappointing". "The supreme court ruled that this group of asylum seekers has the right to work under EU law – the government should not then limit this right down to a small number of asylum seekers who meet the requirements for national shortage occupations."
 

"The shortage occupation list is not designed for asylum seekers but rather economic migrants needing sponsorship to come to the UK. Asylum seekers who have waited so long for a decision should be allowed to work for local employers whenever their skills are needed."
 

Source
with additional material about Serco from Private Eye 1267, 23rd July – 5th August 2010

image

More Asylum Seekers Can Work

posted: 29/07/2010

People who have been waiting for a decision on their asylum claim for more than one year now have the legal right to work, even when they have made a fresh claim. People applying for asylum are not normally allowed to work. If people seeking asylum are still waiting for the first decision on their claim for 12 months or more, then they can ask for permission to work. Few people wait this long for the first decision on asylum claims so this rule does not help many people to work.

But yesterday the Supreme Court opened the door to many more people. It ruled that people who have made a fresh claim for asylum have the same right, if they have waited 12 months or more in total for a decision on their first and a later fresh claim.
 

Campaign Success

This is excellent news for many asylum seekers with HIV and other asylum seekers who do not want to be dependant on the state, but who are keen to work and use their skills to support themselves and their families.George House Trust has supported the national campaign for the right to work and welcomes the decision of the Supreme Court.
 

The Supreme Court was politely but firmly dismissive and critical of the Home Secretary’s weak case. The previous Secretary of State Alan Johnson, decided to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s ruling in April last year which first allowed the right to work.

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court has now recognised that people who have submitted new evidence to support their claim for asylum (a 'fresh claim'), and who have waited longer than 12 months for a Home Office decision on their initial claim, should be given permission to work.
 

Thanks to EU

This is because they are included within the EU ‘Reception Directive’ from the time their application first application was sent in. The Reception Directive says that an asylum seeker can apply for permission to work if they have not had a decision on their claim from the Home Office after 12 months.
 

The Supreme Court dismissed the Secretary of State’s arguments that a fresh application for asylum does not fall within the EU's Reception Directive. The Court said it didn’t accept that this would lead to a rush of unmerited fresh applications being made, and that anyway denying people their right to work was not the proper way to prevent that happening.
 

Welcome for judgement

Jonathan Ellis, Chief Executive of the Refugee Council said:
“We welcome the Supreme Court’s decision to accept that an asylum seeker who has submitted a fresh claim for asylum should be given permission to work after they have waited twelve months for a decision on their claim. The appeal by the former Secretary of State against the Court of Appeal’s decision that this person should be allowed to work, has wasted valuable time and resources at time when asylum seekers should have been supported to get on with their lives rather than face destitution.
 

“The vast majority of asylum seekers who come to the UK would rather support themselves through work than be forced to be homeless or to rely on Government support. Denying asylum seekers the chance to work means they cannot contribute to the UK economy and condemns asylum seekers and their families to abject poverty. We would urge the government to ensure those who have submitted fresh claims for asylum will now be granted support and permission to work under this ruling immediately.”
 

Get advice first before working

People who think they now have the right to work should seek advice from their immigration adviser about applying for permission to work. People are not allowed to simply start working.

Source
Press summary of Judgment - produced by the Supreme Court 
 

The full Supreme Court judgment is not yet available on the court's website - search here later for [2010] UKSC 36  
 

Court entrance image credit Shark Attacks - Creative Commons licence

HIV Tests at Casualty

posted: 27/07/2010

Every person who goes to London A&E departments could soon be tested for HIV under plans being considered by NHS London. In the first move of its kind, the HIV checks could become routine at emergency units and will be offered to any adult attending casualty. The move is being rolled out at Chelsea & Westminster NHS foundation trust following a hugely successful Department of Health funded study at the south-west London hospital.
 

2 people diagnosed every month at one A&E

It comes because of the numbers of people with HIV and the rise in HIV across London. The pilot HIV testing at Chelsea and Westminster’s A&E department found nearly half a dozen new people with HIV in only three months.
 

The Health Protection Agency recently recommended that the NHS should as a matter of routine do a HIV healthcare check everyone when they go to an A&E department in any areas with higher rates of HIV. Now a number of other health trusts are already seriously considering this.
 

North West Too?

In NW England, Manchester, Salford and Blackpool have rates of HIV high enough to justify routine HIV screening in A&E.
 

Better Health and prevention

HIV testing at A&E is one way to improve the health of people with undiagnosed HIV. New figures show that at least one in every four people with HIV do not know they have HIV. Late diagnosis worsens people’s health and shortens people’s lives. Undiagnosed HIV means people don't get the treatment they need for good health and people may be passing on HIV unwittingly to their sexual partners.
 

Under 18s

Dr Rachael Jones, from Chelsea and Westminster hospital, said she has treated nearly a dozen patients under 18 in the last three years in West London but this was just “the tip of the iceberg”.
The consultant blamed ministers for focusing on underage pregnancy instead of on safer sex and said HIV tests should be routine for everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation. She said: “For a long time it was men having sex with men presenting with the virus. Now we're seeing teenagers coming through for the first time with HIV. It only takes one episode of unprotected sex for them to become infected.”
Dr Jones said that the “Don't die of ignorance” shock campaign of the Eighties failed to have a lasting impact and that many teenagers do not even know what HIV is.
 

Source 
 

Health Quango Cuts and HIV

posted: 27/07/2010

Eighteen health quangos will be cut to between eight and 10 over the next four years. The Health Protection Agency (HPA), which deals with HIV and infectious diseases, is one that will disappear within the next two years.
 

The Health Secretary Andrew Lansley justifies the quango cuts on the grounds that it would produce savings of more than £180m over the next four years by streamlining their functions and cutting their bureaucracy. Although the Department of Health's overall budget is being "ring-fenced", the growing demands on the NHS each year mean that significant savings need to be found.
 

Expert Criticism

Experts in infectious diseases criticised the plan to abolish the HPA as a statutory organisation and transfer its functions to the Secretary of State’s new Public Health Service. "It's a very bad idea because the HPA is an absolutely essential national resource," said Hugh Pennington, emeritus professor of bacteriology at Aberdeen University. "There is no merit in making changes to the HPA other than those that strengthen it. It's quasi-independent and a degree of separation between it and the rest of government gives it more scientific freedom and independence," Professor Pennington said.
 

The HPA plays an important role in monitoring and preventing HIV and other sexually transmitted infections in the UK. At the recent International Conference in Vienna it presented important research results and recommendations. Transfering its work to the Secretary of State’s new Public Health Service means its valuable independence disappears.

The HPA in the Department's Quango Review

Here is what the Department of Health Review reports says about abolishing the HPA and setting up a Public Health Service within the Department of Health under the Secretary of State.
 

"3.42 We propose to support the cross-government public health strategy through the creation of a new Public Health Service directly accountable to the Secretary of State, to integrate and streamline existing health improvement and protection bodies and functions, with an increased emphasis on research, analysis and evaluation. As a part of that development we intend to abolish the Health Protection Agency and the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse as statutory organisations and transfer their functions to the Secretary of State as part of the Public Health Service.
[3.43 a paragraph about absorbing the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse into the Public Health Service.]
 

3.44 Our programme for public health will be set out later this year and more detail on what it means for these two organisations, and dedicated public health ring-fenced funding to support delivery of local services, will be set out in the context of the new Public Health Service. We will engage with the Health Protection Agency and the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse to ensure a smooth and orderly transition.
....

Legislative Changes
5.7 Many of the changes outlined in this document will require primary and secondary legislation. The Queen’s speech included a major Health Bill and a Public Bodies Bill for the first legislative programme. The Government will introduce these bills this autumn and the changes, where appropriate, will be enacted through one of these bills: our intention is that the majority of changes will be in place during 2012/13.
.....

The Public Health Service will in place by April 2012. (Annex C)"
 

DH Arms Length Body Review report

Source

Department of Health press release